GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO. et al v. ACUTE MEDICAL, P.C. et al
ORDER denying 31 Motion for Default Judgment, to the refiling of same at the appropriate time. Signed by Judge Jose L. Linares on 2/28/17. (sr, )
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
INSURANCE CO., et al,
Civil Action No.: 16-8030 (JLL)
ACUTE MEDICAL, P.C., et al,
LINARES, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court by way of Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment as
against Defendants Albert Akkerman, M.D. and Clifton Burt, M.D. (ECF No. 31). Specifically,
Plaintiff seeks damages from these Defendants based upon their alleged violations of the New
Jersey Insurance Fraud Prevention Act and for common law fraud, aiding and abetting fraud, and
unjust enrichment. (See Id. at 8-18). On January 5, 2016, the Clerk of Court entered default
against these Defendants for their failure to plead or otherwise respond to complaint. (ECF No.
While the Court recognizes that Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment is now ripe, at this
time, the Court will deny Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment without prejudice to the re-filing
of same at a later date. That is, given that other Defendants (the “answering Defendants”) have
timely answered Plaintiffs’ complaint (ECF Nos. 23, 25) and that this case is therefore in the early
stages of litigation, the Court finds it prudent to postpone any ruling on Plaintiffs’ motion for
default judgment until such time as the claims against the answering Defendants have been
resolved. At that time, the Court will have a better understanding of Plaintiffs’ prospective relief
as against the Defaulting Defendants. Accordingly,
ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for the entry of default judgment (ECF No.3 1) is hereby
DENIED without prejudice to the refiling of same at the appropriate time.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
J E L. LINARES, U.S.D.J.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?